No, I haven’t returned to my Calvinism of limited atonement and eternal suffering. But I was reading Philip Graham Ryken’s book called “What is a True Calvinist?- Basics of the Faith” and I thought that all the hyper-Calvinists along with the crazy Calvinists should get a copy and read it. Says Ryken:
I like that quote about being predestined to holiness (which I entirely agree with).
A holy Calvinist is better than a proud, sinful Universalist. Just as a holy Universalist is better than a proud, sinful Calvinist.
Well said Jonny! I agree. 
A humble servant is better than both 
Being a humble servant is being holy
I copied this post and our subsequent comments on it over from the Members Reading thread, as topically it belongs more here than there (even though the original topic here isn’t about this topic).
“They could have been saved if I had chosen to use the grace that I provided which was sufficient save them, but without my choice to make that efficient they cannot be saved. Therefore it is their own fault if they are finally lost: I gave them sufficient grace to be saved but they didn’t use it because I gave them no ability to use it – no I didn’t command the impossible, only what I chose not to provide them the ability to do!”
Nope, still makes anti-sense when Aquinas tries to argue it. Thomas knew perfectly well (as many Calvinists after him do, and all Arminians) that God does actively provide saving grace to all sinners, and knew perfectly well (as all Calvinists after him do) that if God decides to save someone He’ll get it done. So to keep final perdition he, like many Calvs after him, has to introduce a sleight of mind schism between “sufficient” grace actively provided by God for all sinners and “efficient” grace actively provided for God to only some sinners.
At least the Calvs who go hardcore and deny an active role in God’s provision of sufficient grace are more coherent (to that small extent): God does command that which is impossible for some sinners by God’s choice – not because God could not and did not provide sufficient grace to save them, but because God actively chose not to use that grace in their favor. That grace was never, and was never going to be, for them.
Calvinism is more coherent and Biblical. The inability in man (according to Calvinism) is a moral inability. Man still has natural freedom to choose what he wants. The rebel sinner is unable because has no desire for the things of God. That is to say, he is a rebel sinner who doesn’t want to have anything to do with God as he sins of his own will. Under Calvinism man is therefore responsible for his evil deeds and held accountable by God. By miracle working saving grace God transforms the hearts of the elect by planting the desire for Christ in their hearts. The elect come to Christ because they want to. The reprobate are passed over and left in their sins as God removes even common grace from their hearts and punishes them with His just wrath. The evil stay evil forever and are punished forever. The longer they stay in hell the more evil they become and thus the more just God’s punishment of them is. As R.C. Sproul has pointed out in “Chosen by God” the Reformed Calvinists believe that God’s decree is a positive/negative decree. Evil exists by God permitting it to exist. The hyper-Calvinist, or as R.C. Sproul calls them, anti-Calvinists, teach that God’s decree is positive/positive. According to Sproul, this heresy has God actively creating evil within the hearts of man. In the Reformed Calvinist view God positively intervenes to save the elect and passes over the reprobate.
As if God can positively choose to save only some sinners without positively choosing to not save some sinners. 
That isn’t coherent, Cole. A human could be legitimately absent-minded like that, but not God.
By miracle working saving grace (on any Calv plan) God chooses to give some sinners the moral ability to do better; and thus chooses not to give some sinners the moral ability to do better. They have no possibility of getting that moral ability without God’s choice: He could choose to provide that moral ability for anyone, which not-incidentally is the foundation of any moral ability whatever, but He doesn’t.
It’s like Jesus going up to the lame man at the pool and saying, “Well, I could choose to give you your legs back, but I choose not to. Now, pick up your mat and walk. I SAID PICK UP YOUR MAT AND WALK YOU UNREGENERATED INGRATE! How dare you not do so, I have plenty of grace and power to give you the ability! You have no desire to do so? Because you have no ability? Well, you sure aren’t going to get those legs from anyone other than me! That’s blasphemously false for you to even consider trying to get them from someone else. What? No, I’m not going to give you any legs, I thought I made that sufficiently clear. Don’t question my choice not to do so. Why are you still here? I keep telling you to pick up your mat and walk! Do you think I’m only kidding when I command you to do that? You disrespectful rebel! Here you are sitting by a pool which I have kindly provided for my amusement and glory. I don’t care whether you are grateful about that or not, to the lake of fire with you instead! Because you steadfastly refuse to walk when I choose not to give you any legs, that’s why! My ways are higher than your ways, and my thoughts are higher than your thoughts. As punishment for your crime against my authority, the longer you stay in the lake of fire, the more ruined your body will become – certainly it isn’t going to heal your legs, I’m not baptizing you with fire to be healed – and so you will be ever more unable to walk than before, although I will still keep you in the fire for being unable to walk when I command you to. Do you think because I chose not to give you legs that I actually chose not to give you legs?! Stop blaming me for your problems! You have all the freedom in the world to not walk when I command you to walk! No I am not going to give you the freedom to walk, or even the freedom to choose to not walk instead of to walk. You only have the freedom to not walk, nothing more. WHY ARE YOU NOT WALKING YET INSTEAD OF DISRESPECTING ME FOR NOT WALKING WHEN I TELL YOU TO WALK!?”
Thank God, that isn’t how that scene actually played out. 
I mean in the Bible; obviously it plays out that way in the heads of Calvinists. Though they selectively slur over parts of the total picture.
Jason,
Fallen man doesn’t want God and rebels of his own will. He is therefore accountable for his sins. God is never obligated to give a rebel sinner who doesn’t want to have anything to do with Him the gift of grace. Grace is unmerited favor and never owed to sinners. Your analogy fails. Yes God commands but fallen man willfully rejects God with wanton rebellion. They don’t want to obey and refuse to obey and God is therefore just in punishing them. Remember fallen man has no desire for the things of God. That is, they don’t want to love God. If they don’t want to they don’t have to. But God is never obligated to give such people the gift of grace. It’s like the philanthropist who goes to a homeless shelter and chooses three people to buy a house for and leaves the rest. The philanthropist is under no obligation to buy the others a house just because she buys three a house. This is even more so with God and rebel sinners who don’t want anything to do with Him. He doesn’t owe grace to rebel sinners. Man is unable in the sense that he cannot go contrary to his own will and nature. Just as God cannot go contrary to His own nature. Indeed, it is impossible for God to sin. He still makes choices but they are always right and holy for God has no desire whatsoever to sin. Our entrenched falleness doesn’t make it wrong for God to command us to be good. We ought to delight in God above all things. Therefore it is right for God to command us to find our joy in Him. When we get to heaven all desire for sin will be removed from our hearts as we will be confirmed in grace. We will still choose what we want but we will always choose the right thing because all sinful desires will be gone. This is the essence of true freedom. According to Calvinism, in hell all grace is removed from the hearts of men and they act accordingly. God punishes - they sin - God punishes - they sin and the cycle goes on forever. There is nothing unjust in God punishing forever those who remain evil forever.
It’s incoherent.
The usual points are:
God is absolutely sovereign and absolutely omnipotent.
God chooses to save some and to refrain from saving others.
They all deserve hell because they are completely depraved (because God made them that way).
None of these people have any power to choose God (because God made them completely depraved).
God is not responsible if some (whom He chooses not to save) are not saved.
He makes them helpless and hopelessly depraved and then He tortures them eternally because they are helpless and hopelessly depraved (because He made them that way.)
This is “justice” because Calvin says that God says that it is justice, and whatever Calvin says God says is justice, is thereby justice.
Ridiculous.
This is not a paradox; it is an outright contradiction. There’s no way around it. I don’t know how people even manage to force themselves to believe this harmful and psychologically abusive and dangerous crap.
Cindy,
God doesn’t create evil. God created Adam and Eve by the overflow of His grace. We know it was grace because you cannot deserve to be created. It was His grace that sustained the heart of Adam and Eve before they sinned. When God removed His grace (for justifiable reasons known only to Him) man acted according to his own corrupt desires and will. It was willful and wanton rebellion. Man sinned of his own will and God justly held him accountable. God doesn’t directly cause evil. He’s not the author of evil. When a couple has a baby God doesn’t reach down and directly create fresh evil in her heart. He allows it. We are born with a sinful nature. His permitting evil it is a kind of indirect causing. That is, His permission is a kind of secondary causing not a direct causing. The best example of this is in the book of Job. Satan gets permission from God to torment Job. God allowed Satan to take Job’s family and make Job sick. Yet Job says, “The Lord has given and the Lord has taken away” and “Shall we receive good from God and shall we not receive evil” - to which the writer responds: “In all this Job did not sin with his lips”. So, yes God makes a choice to allow evil, but He doesn’t directly cause evil. We are born with a sinful nature and we cannot go contrary to this nature just as God cannot go contrary to His nature. It is impossible for God to sin because He is holy even though He makes free will decisions. Fallen man doesn’t want to love God and sins of his own will and is therefore held accountable and justly punished. God is never obligated to give a rebel sinner who doesn’t want to have anything to do with Him the gift of grace.
Also Cindy. About Total Depravity.
This is why God takes sin so seriously. He cares so much for the ones created in His image that He will justly punish evil. One of the things God is doing by justly punishing evil and keeping it out of the new creation is protecting His children from the harm and influence evil does. The glory of His justice shines forever as He demonstrates His tender love for His children.
Cindy,
The paradox here is that unregenerate man is a voluntary slave. Even more so for those in hell when all God’s common grace is removed from the hearts of the reprobate. Sin overtakes and masters those in hell. The slavery to sin is one which they are responsible for though. All they want to do is commit evil. They are out of control and shrewdly calculating. All sin is simultaneously pitiable slavery and overt rebelliousness.
And yet “unregenerate man” is, the Calvinists say, helpless to free himself; helpless even to desire that freedom (because that is the way God made him) and it is therefore ALL URG MAN’S FAULT!!! for being what God made him. I’m not buying it, Cole. Never have; never will. And a week ago YOU weren’t buying it either. I know God will never give up on you. I’m not arguing with you here because I’m concerned about you falling away or anything. You know better than what you’re professing here, and when your moods level out, you’ll remember what you know.
I’m writing this for others silently reading this topic. Millions and millions of people are severely traumatized by the terrifying, illogical, impossible, and profoundly untrue doctrines of TULIP Calvinism (as I think you know more than many of us). It’s THEM I’m writing this for. I’m not worried about you, because I know that you know better than this.
And so now that I’ve said my say, I’ll leave it to you to say what you will. You and I both know that you have only very recently said the exact opposite of what you’re saying now. And that you’ve gone in cycles from Calvinist to Christian universalist and back again ever since you’ve been here. It seems to be a recurring theme, but I do notice that you’ve been engaging with people here and that they’ve been engaging with you, and that’s a very good thing. We all care about you, Cole. But I simply can’t let the Calvinist stuff go (no matter who else has also challenged it) without saying something.
Love in Jesus, Cindy
Yes I couldn’t make my mind up about limited atonement and eternal suffering. But I’ve always believed in predestination and for the most part rejected free will. I don’t hold to your universalism. It’s unbiblical. If I did hold to universalism it would be that of “Hope Beyond Hell”. You don’t care about me Cindy and you never have. But I’ve said my peace now. I will stick with the loving Calvinists at the Presbyterian church I’m attending now.
Cole, you don’t know what I think or what I care, and you definitely can’t substantiate that statement. And you obviously don’t know what I believe either. HBH is one of my favorite books on universalism. Try to read what I actually say.
I’m sorry Cindy. I know you care about me. I was upset and shouldn’t have said that. I still believe like Gerry Beauchemin though in “Hope Beyond Hell” that God is in control and reject “free” will. Man is responsible in the sense that He chooses according to his strongest inclination. The problem is that the heart of man is enslaved to sin and therefore he has mixed up desires. But thanks to God all will be free from this enslavement one day and we will freely choose what we want - love God and each other forever and ever!
Don’t worry about it, Cole. It’s okay. You have a right to voice your opinion. I just feel I have to also chime in like I said, because this doctrine terrifies people – understandably. It’s not to hurt you or control you; just to make sure people understand there are many reasons not to believe God torments or destroys people for eternity. Be blessed, dear brother.